Join Request not received in time

LPWAN Modules / EVBs RAK4270
1

Issue:RAK4270 receiving join request late

Setup: RAK4270 - EU868 - OTAA - RAK4270 v3.3.0.18 - Used in AT Mode with slave processor
RX_WINDOW_DURATION: 3000ms
RECEIVE_DELAY_1: 1000ms
RECEIVE_DELAY_2: 2000ms
JOIN_ACCEPT_DELAY_1: 5000ms
JOIN_ACCEPT_DELAY_2: 6000ms

Server: Private LNS

Details: The RAK4270 sends out a join request and the LNS sends out a Join Accept that is sometimes a little slow and I get the following error after 7 seconds

(10:20:57.886) (0:20.732) (1.521) at+join
(10:21:04.979) (0:27.825) (7.093) ERROR: 99

The join accept delays in total are 11 seconds

Why am I getting an error after 7 seconds ?

Is there an AT command for increasing the JOIN accept windows on the RAK4270 ?

We are getting this error on 100’s sensors

Thank you for your assistance

Kind Regards
Paul

2

Hi Paul,

The AT commands of the RAK4270 do not support changing the RX delays for Join or Send. That was added in RUI3, but the RAK4270 is not (and will never) be supported by RUI3.

This

RX_WINDOW_DURATION: 3000ms
RECEIVE_DELAY_1: 1000ms
RECEIVE_DELAY_2: 2000ms
JOIN_ACCEPT_DELAY_1: 5000ms
JOIN_ACCEPT_DELAY_2: 6000ms

are the settings on your LNS?

3

Hi Beegee

These are the settings in the LNS But …

I do see the join accepts sometimes later than 6000ms

Can we shorten the settings in the LNS (without problem) … as we cannot change these settings in the RAK4270 ?

KR
Paul

4

Hi Paul,

Can we shorten the settings in the LNS

That depends on your LNS, I don’t know what you are using. I never needed to change these settings, neither on the LNS nor on the node itself.

5

@beegee

Was the decision to not support the RAK4270 on RUI3 made recently?

Is it due to the function+bloat that has been added? (I compiled the LoRa_P2P.ino example, for RAK3172 and it takes 167232 bytes)

Regards

6

Welcome back @tealbrains

RAK4270 was never planned to be supported by RUI3.

The next release of RUI3 will reduce the code size.

7

Thanks for the clarification @beegee

Good to know. I had some hopes based on the following post:

I suppose it is not aligned with your product roadmap

8

We were thinking about it in the past. But RAK4270 has a different AT command interface and moving it to RUI3 will cause big issues for customers.
Or we would have to maintain different firmware versions for the RAK4270, which is a logistics problem.